Entry access security has evolved from the physical key and mechanical lock combination, to the smart or proximity keycard and electronic lock combination, and now to the mobile device and electronic lock combination. Two factors propelling this evolutionary shift are convenience and security.
Physical keys are neither convenient nor secure. Convenience was compromised as a result of having to carry different physical keys for different entry points, finding the correct key for the desired entry point, and inserting and manipulating the key within the mechanical lock in order to gain access. A new physical key would have to be obtained for a lost key. There was also no means by which access could be remotely granted or revoked by a security administrator. Security was especially problematic as a simple mechanical device found in almost any hardware store could be used to generate one or more copies of a key. This made it virtually impossible for a key issuer or security administrator to really know if a key recipient or others have truly lost access to the entry point when the key recipient returns the key. The expense and difficulty associated with rekeying the mechanical locks further exacerbated the security shortcomings associated with physical keys.
Smart keycards or proximity keycards provide added convenience to the user as well as the keycard administrator relative to physical keys. The keycard user could use the same keycard to access different entry points within the same or different buildings under common administration. Some keycards require a simple swipe through a reader and other require nearing the keycard to a reader (i.e., to within a few inches from the reader) to initiate a wireless unlock process. The keycard administrator could remotely grant or revoke access permissions to a keycard user without physically holding the user's keycard. The keycards also allowed administrators the ability to digitally track who accessed which door at what times.
As technology progresses, some of these conveniences have soured into inconveniences. For instance, the need to swipe or bring the keycard near a reader is not that different than having to retrieve a physical key for insertion in a mechanical lock. Moreover, the entire process of using the keycard in conjunction with the reader (e.g., swiping or bringing the keycard in range of the reader), having the reader initiate a message exchange with the keycard, the processing of the keycard information either at the reader or at a remote system, and the physical unlocking can still take a few seconds, thereby interrupting the user's motion and leaving the user waiting for the door to unlock or open.
With respect to security, smart keycards or proximity keycards do little to address the shortcomings of physical keys. The credentials providing users access to different entry points can be easily read and copied from one keycard to another with the copying becoming as easy, if not easier, than copying a physical key. In a Black Hat conference in 2015, keycard reproduction was demonstrated with a $10 device with the reproduction occurring in under one minute. This is especially problematic since a single keycard can be used to access multiple access point without the guesswork of having to locate the correct physical key.
Smartphones have become ubiquitous. Nearly everyone carries a smartphone with them wherever they go. Smartphones have multiple layers of security including code or biometric unlocking of the smartphone, secondary protections for accessing applications or user accounts, encryption of stored information, location verification in accessing applications, services, or data, private integrated circuits with identifying or decrypting information, etc. These security layers have made smartphones as safe, if not safer, to use for credit based transactions than physical credit cards with a magnetic stripe or integrated circuit. The wireless connectivity of a smartphone also makes the smartphone ideal for remote administration.
Although able to overcome many of the security shortcomings of keycards, the prior art usage of smartphones as access devices renders the smartphone no more or less convenient to use than keycards. Using a smartphone as an access device creates additional battery, processor, or bandwidth usage in order to wirelessly exchange messages with the entry point reader or security system. Current prior art usage of smartphones as access devices are no faster and are sometimes slower to use than keycards. Many current implementations require the same removal of the smartphone from a pocket, purse, or bag to initiate the unlock process once within a distance from the entry point reader. Many current smartphone based implementations adapt Internet protocols that have significant overhead and involve multiple message exchanges to perform the unlocking. This slows the unlock process relative to the simple messaging used for keycard based implementations. Other shortcomings with respect to convenience materialize in the implementation and user interface.
For these and other reasons, smart keycards or proximity keycards continue to dominate the market and remain, by a large margin, the access device of choice for most corporations. Accordingly, there is a need for improved convenience in using a smartphone as an entry point access device. More specifically, there is a need to improve the speed, reliability, and functionality of the smartphone as an access device without compromising security or the user's ability to use the smartphone for any other purpose whether because of battery drain, processor usage, bandwidth usage, or other resources utilized in using the smartphone as an access device.